Is classified. It's so we feel secure nationally.

all those blanked out parts make me feel less secure, especially knowing some stuff about the names that aren't redacted- i suppose some of those invisible public servants might say i'm unAmerican

Page 13 at the top: SECRET/***/NOFORN/ORCON the scribbled out 3 letter whatever it is, is partly visible- I'd say the

1st letter is L almost for sure
2nd - C or G ?
3rd - S - see pg 2 also for this one

What would this be- is it necessarily an agency, or is it a code? Might the characters be numbers?

pg 13 is the most clear that i can see, but bits on other pages are slightly visible.

9/11 Family Steering Committee Review of the 9/11 Commission Report:
http://911truth.org/images/resources/Family%20Steering%20Cmte%20review%2...

Complete 9/11 Timeline
http://cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

Not Releasable to Foreign Nationals/Governments/Non-US Citizens

ORCON...

Dissemination & Extraction of Information Controlled by Originator

That always looked spooky , and not in a good way. It produces anxiety in people, not security. It's bollox anyway--like police investigations, once it's over and you have the perp, it should be ALL available to the public.

Mind they probably drag out some poncy excuse like " well, its never really over thats why we can't tell you everything".

*sigh*
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/
http://truthaction.org/forum/
http://www.911blacklist.org/

"Believe me, there is enough information to suggest that it did happen.."

Sorry, but i dont really like to just "believe" people on such things, i prefer to see some actual evidence.
Why should i speculate on someones 'believes' ?
This whole story seems really dubious to me.

Don't believe me. Do your own research.

Yes, ive done my own research. And i came to the conclusion that this story is highly dubious from a to z.
Its very speculative, and the sources are dubious too. Not even to mention the conflicts of interest ....
Also, as Danse points out below, even if it were true, what does it mean?
It seems quite weird to me that someone who thinks the demolition of the towers is 'speculation' would consider this whole story as bulletproof.
Sounds like a double-standard to me.

I've done the research, and it doesn't seem very speculative, and the sources don't seem dubious. Nor did I say it was bulletproof. What is EXTREMELY apparent is the 9/11 Commission's obvious cover-up of this story.

Incidentally, when's the last time a hit piece, or documentary designed to debunk something mentioned the allegation that Lt. General Mahmood Ahmed ordered Omar Sheikh to wire transfer $100k to Mohammad Atta, and showed that it didn't happen? Never?

"incidentally, when's the last time a hit piece, or documentary designed to debunk something mentioned the allegation that Lt. General Mahmood Ahmed..."

I dont know, probably never because nobody really cares about this story?
It doesnt really challenge the 911 myth of freedom-hating muslim hijackers, there isnt all that much to "debunk" here.
And even if true, it doesnt really mean all that much. So why bother.
It sounds more like useful confusion and somkescreen to me.
Anyways , Jon, your "see they dont 'debunk' this because they can't - unlike CD which can be debunked so easily" argument is getting really really tiring.
It seems to be all you got, but its obviously totally flawed, as many people have pointed out again and again.

"I dont know, probably never because nobody really cares about this story?"

Which is why the families submitted a question about this very subject to the 9/11 Commission in the hopes that they would answer it. Which is why this story has shown up in 90% of all 9/11 related books written, as well as 9/11 related movies made.

"It doesnt really challenge the 911 myth of freedom-hating muslim hijackers, there isnt all that much to "debunk" here."

It's the Real Thing.

"And even if true, it doesnt really mean all that much. So why bother."

Doesn't sound to me like you're someone that's really interested in the truth about 9/11. Maybe you're just someone that likes to bother me?

"It seems to be all you got, but its obviously totally flawed, as many people have pointed out again and again."

Pakistan's connection to 9/11 is all I got? Controlled Demolition isn't used against us at every opportunity? Something tells me that your idea of flawed, and my idea of flawed are two totally different things.

Now em7, as Reprehensor told you, stop being my gadfly.

"Pakistan's connection to 9/11 is all I got? "

No Jon, we know you also have the august 6 warning and all that ..
I was talking about your tiring "see they only debunk CD but never the foreknoledge or the wire transfer" 'argument' that you bring up *all the time*.
Not once did you reply to a critique of that argument, and there were dozens.
See, if you keep on applying such obvious double-standards , like accepting all sorts of dubious stories as 'proof' as long as theres some muslims involved - and on the other hand labeling and attacking people as '"theorists who dont really want the truth" when they talk about the obvious demolition of 3 buildings - you have to expect that some people will disagree with you. Persistently and strongly.
You keep on posting the SAME STUFF over and over again. Since years. Thats why some people disagree over and over again.
Your "muslims did 911 and US allowed it to happen" stories just dont fit in with *what we know*, that those 3 buildings were blown up, and thats why many people believe that your stories are misleading.
Now you can post your 'ah so you you know exactly what happend i dont' stuff that you usually do in such a situation.
So to pre-answer: no, i dont know exactly what happend, but i can apply common sense, which is why i know that 3 buildings were blown up.

em7, if I may:

The more you think you know, and the less you think, the more you'll think you know.
However, the more you think, the more you'll know the less you know.

Think about it.

/////////////////////////////////
Great minds ... think for themselves.

"And no, we DON'T know that "3 buildings were blown up", but go on thinking that you know that. If thinking that you are 100% correct makes you feel safe living in this crazy world, then by all means."

Thats absurd Jon. Its the sort of thing theyre telling us in "debunker" movies, "conspiracy theorists just feel better believing what they do" sort of crap.
Interesting to see youre using the same sort of tactics when it comes to the obvious demolition of 3 buildings on 911.

"em7... what have you got other than an anonymous name?"

So is this a 'i have more blogs online than you' competition?
Or is it a popularity contest?
Admittedly, im a truther-nobody on the internets. But ive got common sense. And i dont judge people by the number of blogs they posted, but by its content.
It is already well known that you posted more misleading smokescreen blogs about 9/11 than anyone else, whilest at the same time desperately trying to steer people away from the obvious demolitions (which did more to grow awareness in public than anything else). Whilest always using the family members as shields so people cant criticise you.
No need to repost all that.

This is a lie;

"It is already well known that you posted more misleading smokescreen blogs about 9/11 than anyone else, whilest at the same time desperately trying to steer people away from the obvious demolitions (which did more to grow awareness in public than anything else). Whilest always using the family members as shields so people cant criticise you."

It seems to me that the only reason you come to this site is to pick fights with Jon Gold. Jon has posted tons of informative, useful blogs, quite a few of them here, and that's a fact.

This has been going on "since years" and I'm sick of it. Go find someone else to stalk and draw into arguments, and do it somewhere else.

DRG, Steven Jones, Richard Gage, and a whole lot of other professionally experienced, science-based people do know for a fact: the towers were destroyed with pre-planted explosives. People with a lot more experience and knowledge of such matters than Jon Gold. So although he may not know anything about how the towers came down, that ignorance doesn't transfer to the rest of us.

> but go on thinking that you know that. If thinking that you are 100% correct makes you feel safe living in this crazy world, then by all means.

What an odd concept. You form your beliefs based on how safe something makes you feel (?!) I guess that could explain a lot.

Because I think you guys are doing a great job attacking me. Keep it up.

BTW... Can you give me the name of someone involved in planting the explosives?

But I'm not attacking you, just pointing out that your (self-proclaimed) ignorance does not necessarily carry over to the rest of the population. I'm sorry you view this as an attack.

And I'm glad you asked. The arrow of suspicion clearly points at Larry Silverstein, Jerome Hauer and the men of Urban Moving Systems.
They got some splainin to do.

no offense, but i am aghast that so many supposed 911 truth people would still not accept demolition! i'm in a state of disbelief! what do they think happened?
What about Dr. Steven JOnes's research, etc...the thermate signatures in the microspheres??? pulverized everything...it's been a while since i've been here, and i'm sorry about that. it is important for there to be an informative and compelling 911 blog site..i have met some of the best on 9/11 blogger. but now some have been banned, which is a shame.